Retina MacBook Pro Pushes the Limits of its Graphics Capabilities

[blow45]

All I know is I seen someone load Bf3 using bootcamp to run windows 7 and it looked great. He was able to play the game at full resolution 2880x1800 at high settings and achieve a respectable 30-40fps averaging at around 34fps. Now although 30 odd is not groundbreaking, at that resolution it's not bad at all. Of course switching the graphics to ultra dropped the fps really low between 15-20 fps which in a first person shooter is rubbish but hey, what do you expect at that high a res.

My point being, if it can run a fps like bf3 at over 30Fps at 2880x1800 then it proves it's a very capable machine. Plus in windows at the highest resolution it works very smooth and no drop in fps when scrolling through any pages including FB. So I think it really is software problems with lion. Everybody keeps saying it has to be the hardware. If that's true how come windows 7 works just as good as it does on my my iMac without any lag. I prefer lion so I hope they solve this problem soon. Hate going into windows, if it weren't for the odd game and 3ds max I would never even enter windows.


Someone will no daught shoot my findings out of the water about how wrong I am and my opinion is wrong but I don't care.

Well you know, you do have a point, if windows runs lagless and more people verify this then it's a software issue and anand shrimp is talking out of his behind (won't be the first time).

If this is the case then it's yet another testament to how **** os x has become, sadly.

 

[SirHaakon]

Seriously, this thread is a joke. People don't read anything and just keep posting nonsense.

Try playing a movie (doesn't even have to be HD) with Quicktime on the RMBP configured at 1920x1200 "mode" and then hit the fullscreen button and watch what happens.

 

[twoodcc]

finally software is ahead of hardware? it seems like it. glad i waited on getting one now

 

[SirHaakon]

I own a 2009 MBP and I tested the Retina in the store, it was smoother than my 2009 MBP for sure doing stuff like opening dashboard or expose. So no, it's not the laggiest of them all.

That's because the ones in the stores are set to crap resolution.

 

[magbarn]

Well you know, you do have a point, if windows runs lagless and more people verify this then it's a software issue and anand shrimp is talking out of his behind (won't be the first time).

If this is the case then it's yet another testament to how **** os x has become, sadly.

So Anand's a shrimp and your credentials are?
Reason it runs better at native resolution or in windows is that it's the scaler thats the problem. The hd4000 and gtx650m doesn't have the hardware scaling set up to render at 3800x2400 and then downsample to 1900x1200. Ergo, the CPU ends up doing much of it. Windows and BF3 dont do this crazy upscale/downscale routine. ML is supposed to be able to offload more of it back in the gpu to free up the CPU to decode Facebook(or any other poorly written) web page.

 

[50548]

I'm gonna keep posting this over and over until people take 5 seconds to read it.


8 Core Mac Pro with ATI 5870 on 30" ACD with 2560*1600

Scrolling Facebook 31 fps and 100% cpu on Safari web process

Scrolling Macrumors, 48 fps and 8% cpu Safari web process

This is NOT a rMBP issue at all.

The testing is done the exact same way as Anandtech, using Quartz Debug tool to measure framerates. The 5870 is a 3.5 times more powerful GPU than GT650M and more powerful than any mobile GPU Apple could have put in. So the problem is not the GPU, at all.

So...is Mark Sugarloaf's FB the NEW FLASH now? Just asking...

 

[the8thark]

Those are not reasonable FPS. You need over 30 and personally I need it doubled to 60FPS for perfect fluidity. Yes I know about the "human eyes can only distinguish...", spare me. I notice the glitches that only 30FPS brings. I also don't care about fans and "ugly" because my GPU in a case I never need to open. I don't care about power because my city is 95% hydro and 50ºC all the time so heat powered exhaust is a GOOD thing

Need vs want here.

You want 60 fps.
You do not need 60 fps.

Enough fps to make the game playable or the application workable is all that is needed.

And maybe you don't care about power. That's cool. But a lot of other people do. And also more fans = more noise.

 

[RebelScum]

I NEED a dedicated GPU also. I'm not sure. I may try using my current laptop or maybe my ipad 3 and just bring my desktop to college. I really wanted to leave it at home though.

Sorry I'm skipping a bunch of this thread to ask this so it may have been answered, but, what are you going to school for?

Unless it's a 3D animation program, or something to do with after effects, and even then a very advanced one, I doubt you'd find yourself "needing" a dedicated GPU.

Wanting?? Sure. And it makes sense for the future. But on the day, I'm curious if it's something you'd actually need.

 

[Sporaktu]

Try playing a movie (doesn't even have to be HD) with Quicktime on the RMBP configured at 1920x1200 "mode" and then hit the fullscreen button and watch what happens.

I actually haven't done that in Quicktime, but in VLC I watch videos (many HD) almost every day full screen and have no lag problems. This tells me that this is another instance where apple's software isn't really up to snuff.

In a similar instance, using Safari causes severe scrolling lag, something that popped up in chrome and canary chrome as well; when canary Chrome was updated Friday, however, almost all of the scroll lag was gone. Now, whether that was due to Google's disabling of the APIs that caused all those macs to crash or if they just released more efficient code, I don't know. I do, however, keep finding more and more proof every day about these problems being software related.

 

[mrbyu]

The old saying still apply. Don't buy a first gen apple product.

Here is short reminder list just up my head.

1st gen Ipod battery that lasted only 18 months
Recent recal for 1st gen Ipod nano for battery/unit replacement
First gen MBP overheating due to bad application of thermal compound
First gen polycarbonate MB palm rest chipping
First gen unibody MB poor screen quality

Somebody has to buy it, otherwise Apple couldn't test it in real life conditions and smooth out the glitches.

So thank you all "I am rich so I'm buying a new maxed out Mac in every 1-2 years" people. With your help we, the so called "we are not so rich, but we love to use our good old machines for at least 3-4-5 years" people can always buy a reliable, long-lasting product.

 

[blow45]

So Anand's a shrimp and your credentials are?
Reason it runs better at native resolution or in windows is that it's the scaler thats the problem. The hd4000 and gtx650m doesn't have the hardware scaling set up to render at 3800x2400 and then downsample to 1900x1200. Ergo, the CPU ends up doing much of it. Windows and BF3 dont do this crazy upscale/downscale routine. ML is supposed to be able to offload more of it back in the gpu to free up the CPU to decode Facebook(or any other poorly written) web page.

It's his surname, anand lal shrimp, I didn't call him a shrimp for crying out loud, what sort of put down is it anyway to call someone a shrimp?

I still don't get why the gpu isn't taking up the task in lion and what will change in ml, if they don't have the hardware set up, and what does that mean btw, then they are waiting for new drivers? Can you be more precise, it doesn't make sense really... I understand how windows is not up scaling and then downscaling, but what will change in ml? The gpu at the moment via their drivers do what they have to do in os x, what's the difference then in ml, what exact mechanism will they use that they don't in ml?

 

[Sasoon]

I don't know what is all this fuss about 2880x1800 resolution. I was runing 15 years ago monitor at 1600x1200 resolution. You would expect that 15 years later, graphics cards will work with 10,000x6,000 pixels without problem

 

[gnasher729]

Try playing a movie (doesn't even have to be HD) with Quicktime on the RMBP configured at 1920x1200 "mode" and then hit the fullscreen button and watch what happens.

Which is obviously a stupid thing to do, since you will get less quality at higher cost. Now compare to an ordinary 15" MBP. What happens if you configure it to 1920 x 1200 mode? Nothing happens, because you can't.

Guys, the Retina MacBook Pro has a 1440 x 900 screen. As with any LCD screen, you have the choice to choose some other resolutions, at a cost. What's unique to the Retina MacBook Pro is that you have a choice to have higher resolutions than the native one, at a cost.

It's his surname, anand lal shrimp, I didn't call him a shrimp for crying out loud, what sort of put down is it anyway to call someone a shrimp?

Anand Lal Shimpi. Not Shrimp, Shimpi.

 

[johnmacward]

I'm really curious to see when external GPUS via thunderbolt will become available.

Considering they're trying to make MacBook devices thinner, lighter and more mobile, I wouldn't think there's much emphasis on these devices at all. You're carrying around another unit, another power adapter, adding bulk to what is supposed to be the lightest most powerful notebook you can get. It can't and shouldn't be an excuse for iffy graphics performance. If zooming in on web page content is a struggle then there's something wrong, because after that there's no point in running a game, starting a 3d application and so on...

----------

I don't know what is all this fuss about 2880x1800 resolution. I was runing 15 years ago monitor at 1600x1200 resolution. You would expect that 15 years later, graphics cards will work with 10,000x6,000 pixels without problem

Man, you were lucky. Most of the rest of us were enjoying 640 x 480.

 

[iBug2]

That's because the ones in the stores are set to crap resolution.

Not really, it was at the retina resolution which I'm going to use the machine at when I buy it.

 

[mrbyu]

Guys, the Retina MacBook Pro has a 1440 x 900 screen. As with any LCD screen, you have the choice to choose some other resolutions, at a cost. What's unique to the Retina MacBook Pro is that you have a choice to have higher resolutions than the native one, at a cost.

That's the stupidest interpretation I've ever heard. No, the retina MBP indeed has a 2880 x 1800 screen, with 2880 x 1800 pixels.

The "relative" resolution of the screen is of course 1440 x 900, but that doesn't mean that it was intended to be used with actual 1440 x 900 res. Come on, that's the resolution of the 13" MBA... and you think a 2200$ computer is meant to be used with lower pixel density than the entry level MacBook Air (non-retina MBP 15": 110 ppi < MBA 13": 128 ppi < MBA 11": 135 ppi), and the retina is just an extra with some additional costs? You must be kidding.

 

[newdeal]

...

I wonder how the 13" version will do, will have fewer pixels but I wonder if they will get discrete graphics in it

 

[LeChris]

Its all about the software

Hey Guys, I own a Macbook Pro Retina 2,3 GHz since two weeks and can tell you that - concerning the hardware - it IS a fast working machine.

What makes it sometimes slow is the software. Just an example:

I experienced that scrolling through webpages with SAFARI is indeed not a very smooth experience. But looking at the same pages with the GOOGLE CHROME CANARY browser, which is beta but yet optimized for Retina Resolutions, everything looks smooth again (>30fps) like it used to be with my former MBP.

My conclusion is that the hardware is not the limiting factor, its the software that should be updated and optimized.

Some words for web designers who are interested in buying a MBP Retina:

It is a wonderful (and pricey) piece of technology. But if you are a web designer like me and everyday in need of Photoshop you should better wait until there is an update of Photoshop CS6, otherwise you'll be disappointed as everything looks smeary and ugly - even typo. Anyway with a Retina display, your workflow will change, since you are working with a much higher resolution. Just imagine, you have to resize (50%) every page layout that you are going to send to your clients as they won't be able to look at 2880x1800px JPGs.

If you are kind of a mobile photographer, working with Aperture 3.3, go get it. The screen is simply fantastic and will impress your clients!

 

[Theophany]

Exactly. People here are acting like it's the end of the world. "oh that's bad, 28fps isn't enough for a window animation. Guess I'm getting the worse, non-retina MacBook Pro for the same price, then."

It isn't acceptable when you're paying a £300 premium for a piece of hardware that has a noticeable impact on the whole package. And these pathetic excuses along the lines of software sorting the problem are laughable. The simple fact is that rendering such an enormous quantity of pixels on such underpowered mobile hardware is going to hurt.

I get it, really I do. Apple wanted to be first to the market. They wanted to push the envelope in the same way that they usually do. However, when you're charging a significant premium for that cutting-edge tech, to find it lacking as a direct result of this is not cool. I wouldn't drop £70k on a BMW with an engine so powerful that the traction control couldn't handle simple manoeuvres, why is a laptop any different?

 

[scottrichardson]

As has been said by others...

The new iPad is retina 2048 x 1536 pixels and scrolling is smooth. That's higher resolution than ANY macbook apart from the new macbook pro, yet it's powered by a much smaller GPU.

I'm sure there's room to improve the performance with software and optimisations.

At 2560 x 1440 on a 27" iMac, people running their browser full screen would likely suffer similar low frame rates.

 

[JohnDoe98]

It isn't acceptable when you're paying a £300 premium for a piece of hardware that has a noticeable impact on the whole package. And these pathetic excuses along the lines of software sorting the problem are laughable. The simple fact is that rendering such an enormous quantity of pixels on such underpowered mobile hardware is going to hurt.

I get it, really I do. Apple wanted to be first to the market. They wanted to push the envelope in the same way that they usually do. However, when you're charging a significant premium for that cutting-edge tech, to find it lacking as a direct result of this is not cool. I wouldn't drop £70k on a BMW with an engine so powerful that the traction control couldn't handle simple manoeuvres, why is a laptop any different?

What's unacceptable is to expect the impossible, regardless of the price. The problem has clearly been identified, the CPU is the bottleneck for a very small number of tasks with these incredibly high pixel densities. The fact of the matter is we must all ask ourselves, would we rather have these resolutionary displays that have a few hickups or stick to the older resolutions that are smooth and fluid in all tasks. For my part, seeing as I purchased the Retina display, I fall into the former category.

Software optimizations are only going to go so far, and at the end of the day, the scrolling and animations causing some jerkiness are not going to be fully solved. There is no current solution. People complain we should have multi-threaded browsers by now, "its 2012 after all", but if they just paused to think of it for a second, they would realize why that isn't going to happen.

Think of it this way. Imagine you wanted to scroll on a webpage yet have that scrolling handled by multiple-cores. How would that work? Let's imagine we want to use 2 cores. Well, presumably you would have to scroll half the page with one core and the other with the second core. So far so good, but what happens if half the screen has more data to compute? Now you have one core finishing before the other and so what you see on the screen is going to be terrible. Splitting up the tasks over multiple cores runs you straight into a synchronization problem.

If you could find a way to solve that concurrency problem, well then inform Apple, I'm sure they will be happy to cut you a nice check since you will have found the solution to all this lagginess and jitteriness.

 

[Gemütlichkeit]

The hardware can handle that resolution fine. The software isn't optimized.

 

[apolloa]

The old saying still apply. Don't buy a first gen apple product.

Here is short reminder list just up my head.

1st gen Ipod battery that lasted only 18 months
Recent recal for 1st gen Ipod nano for battery/unit replacement
First gen MBP overheating due to bad application of thermal compound
First gen polycarbonate MB palm rest chipping
First gen unibody MB poor screen quality

So what is wrong with the first gen iPad then?

 

[HishamAkhtar]

I don't know what is all this fuss about 2880x1800 resolution. I was runing 15 years ago monitor at 1600x1200 resolution. You would expect that 15 years later, graphics cards will work with 10,000x6,000 pixels without problem

...what...

 

[dpasc]

I have to admit, all this info is making me a bit nervous considering I ordered my MBPr 2 weeks ago. I'm in a tricky place because I'm starting a masters degree this september and my only computer, a 2007 macbook, can't run the software I need very well anymore, so I need a new laptop, and it's pretty important to me that I get an apple laptop (PCs always fail me) and something with a 15" screen (I find 13" too small for the software I use). So I know I needed to buy either a 15" macbook pro, or the 15" macbook pro retina. I'm intending for my new laptop to last me 5 years, just like my last one. I don't mind that the MBPr only has 256 flash, because I use externals like crazy. And I figured because the price is so similar, it would make sense to have a retina screen for the next 5 years so as software develops my screen can utilize that.

Any advice guys?